Laryngotracheobronchial papillomatosis: chest CT findings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To evaluate the findings on chest CTs in 16 patients (8 men and 8 women) with laryngotracheobronchial papillomatosis. This was a retrospective study involving patients ranging from 2 to 72 years of age. The evaluation of the CT scans was independently performed by two observers, and discordant results were resolved by consensus. The inclusion criteria were presence of abnormalities on the CT scans, and the diagnosis was confirmed by anatomopathological examination of the papillomatous lesions. The most common symptoms were hoarseness, cough, dyspnea, and recurrent respiratory infections. The major CT findings were nodular formations in the trachea, solid or cavitated nodules in the lung parenchyma, air trapping, masses, and consolidation. Nodular formations in the trachea were observed in 14 patients (87.5%). Only 2 patients had lesions in lung parenchyma without tracheal involvement. Only 1 patient had no pulmonary dissemination of the disease, showing airway involvement only. Solid and cavitated lung nodules were observed in 14 patients (87.5%) and 13 (81.2%), respectively. Masses were observed in 6 patients (37.5%); air trapping, in 3 (18.7%); consolidation in 3 (18.7%); and pleural effusion, in 1 (6.3%). Pulmonary involvement was bilateral in all cases. The most common tomography findings were nodular formations in the trachea, as well as solid or cavitated nodules and masses in the lung parenchyma. Malignant transformation of the lesions was observed in 5 cases.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".